Ambidexterity in Public Management: the MAIA Techno-Organizational Model and its Application in the Apulia Region

In the last century, the governance of public administrations has undergone a paradigm change. The emergence of public participation and transparent procedures, also enabled by Internet, open data and social media, has driven... [ view full abstract ]

In the last century, the governance of public administrations has undergone a paradigm change. The emergence of public participation and transparent procedures, also enabled by Internet, open data and social media, has driven the introduction of a post-bureaucratic system which is flat, connected and flexible, with individual empowerment as a key to address environmental complexity. This new system should balance the trade-offs between creativity, innovation and flexibility needed to solve emerging societal challenges and the efficiency as a basis of sustainable competitiveness.
In such scenario, this article aims to present the static (forms) and dynamic (flows) elements of an ambidextrous organizational model to be adopted by central administrations and public agencies. The model is designed to optimize four interconnected dimensions: Organizational, related to the mix of exploration and exploitation activities; Individual, related to empowerment as a foundation of people growth and organizational development; Inter-organizational, related to networks as a mean for new knowledge acquisition; and Decisional, related to the complex decision process which requires analytical tools.
The model defined is applied as a pilot test to Apulia, a developing region in southern Italy with a population of 4 million inhabitants and a growing GDP and import-export performance. In particular, the study presents the actions required for the operationalization of ambidexterity. A matrix structure is presented that integrates competencies related to Project Management structures, Business Process Management Systems, Dynamic Policy Making, and Research and Innovation. The article also introduces the functional requirements for a Decision Support System aimed to measure regional performance and the ability to deliver hi-quality services.
The paper contributes at both theoretical level, by expanding the discussion on organic rather than mechanic models as privileged organizational archetypes in dynamic and collaborative scenarios, and practitioner level, through the preliminary proof-of-concept adoption of a comprehensive techno-organizational system for public organizations.

Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C. and Bloomberg, L. (2014), “Public Value Governance: Moving Beyond Traditional Public Administration and the New Public Management”. Public Administration Review, 74: 445–456.
Crawford L.H. and Helm J. (2009) “Government and governance: the value of project management in the public sector”, Project Management Journal, 40(1): 73-88.
Gupta A.K., Smith K.G. and Shalley C.E. (2006) “The interplay between exploration and exploitation”, Academy of Management Journal, 49(4): 693–706.
Kerzner H.R. (2010), “Project Management - Best Practices: Achieving Global Excellence”, Wiley.
Jansen J.P., Tempelaar M.P., van den Bosch F.A.J. and Volberda H.W. (2009) “Structural differentiation and ambidexterity: the mediating role of integration mechanisms”, Organization Science, 20(4): 797-811.
O'Flynn J. (2007) “From New Public Management to Public Value: Paradigmatic Change and Managerial Implications”, Australian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 66, Issue no. 3, pp. 353–366
O’Reilly C. and Tushman M.L. (2013). “Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future”, The Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 27, No. 4, 324–338.
Pollitt C., and Bouckaert G. (2011). “Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis—New Public Management, Governance, and the Neo-Weberian State”. Oxford University Press.
Raisch S. (2009) “Organizational ambidexterity: balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance”, Organization Science, 20(4): 685-695.